C reative Commons (CC) licenses

advertisement
AALLSpectrum_Apr:1
3/16/10
1:51 PM
Page 20
f r e
e
i n g
c r e a t
Understanding the Creative Commons licenses
By Steven J. Melamut
C
reative Commons
(CC) licenses
offer authors
increased potential for
broad distribution.
Simple terms and instant
authorization make these
licenses very attractive to
users and providers alike.
U.S. copyright law inhibits
use, whereas CC licenses
promote wide
dissemination of materials.
What are CC licenses and
how do they differ from
copyright?
20
AALL Spectrum
■
April 2010
When Copyright
Doesn’t Work
As I typed the text of this
article into my computer
and saved it to the hard
drive, it became entitled to a bundle of
rights called copyright. Protection is
granted automatically, regardless of my
intention, and requires no intervention
upon my part. Users may not copy,
publish, translate, or distribute this
text without permission. (There are
exceptions, such as “fair use,” but ignore
that for the moment.)
When the copyright law was initially
written, books, maps, and charts were
protected for a maximum of 28 years
provided that the material was registered,
a copy of the work was placed in a
depository, and the author was American.
This means that at that time, my article
would have been unprotected. Copyright
law provided exclusive rights to printing,
reprinting, or publishing a work.
Copyright law now protects most
creative works automatically when
they are placed in a tangible form—
registration, deposit, and notice are no
longer required. Congress has increased
the length of the copyright term 11 times
in the past 40 years. Today, works are
protected until 70 years after the creator’s
death—and perhaps longer if Congress
retroactively extends the period again.
Most librarians have faced copyright
questions because by nature of their
work they distribute copyrighted
information. Once upon a time, a law
firm librarian would circulate an original
publication to interested parties. The
book or publication would travel from
office to office. Later, as technologies
changed, it became the practice to
circulate copies of the original, which in
turn brought both copyright concerns
and litigation. Today, the wide use of
e-mail and intranets leads to the
distribution of digital copies, which
raises even more legal questions. This is
© Steven J. Melamut • image © iStockphoto.com/Lise Gagne
especially true because it is not possible to
use any material on a computer without
creating a copy and thereby raising the
specter of copyright violation.
Those of us in education have all
encountered questions about placing
materials on the internet and course
management systems, often from
instructors who want to
distribute the most
recent and
relevant
materials to
their classes.
Frequently,
we are asked
to find a way
to distribute
articles from
today’s newspaper
or a recent journal
article. Many schools
used to assume that
“fair use” covered all of
these uses, but it has become
clear that this is an imprudent
course. The legal term “fair use” is not
the same as most people’s idea of fair use
and is usually defined in a court of law.
As a result, most schools have policies
defining what they consider fair use and
ultimately what level of risk they are
willing to assume. Some schools seek and
pay for permissions on all materials used
in course-management application in an
effort to avoid this question.
Seeking traditional permissions
under copyright law can be incredibly
frustrating. The costs of licenses are
frequently out of proportion to their
apparent value. In many cases it is not
possible to identify or locate the rights
owner, and, in some cases, the rights
owners no longer exist. Furthermore,
determining whether material has
entered the public domain and may be
AALLSpectrum_Apr:1
3/16/10
1:52 PM
Page 21
e a t i v i t y
AALL Spectrum
■
April 2010
21
AALLSpectrum_Apr:1
3/17/10
1:26 PM
Page 22
used without permission has become
complex as a result of the periodic
revision of the statutes.
Obtaining copyright permissions is a
time consuming endeavor under the best
of circumstances since most publishers
only grant written permission and may
not accept e-mail or rush requests. Many
materials do not get used or distributed
simply because it is too much of a hassle
or the transaction costs are prohibitive.
Enter the Creative Commons
and scientific works. CC licenses apply
in addition to copyright and do not seek
to replace copyright. It is important to
note that nothing in the CC licenses
affects “fair use.” CC does not modify,
clarify, or in any way affect those
existing rights under the copyright law.
Digital technology and the internet
have promoted increased creativity
including many derivative works. Many
artists create “mashups” of audio or video
files. Visual artists may digitally alter a
photograph or picture to create a new
derivative work. Others combine
numerous digital files into a single new
work. CC licenses help create a pool of
resources that can be freely used for these
purposes. The CC license even adds a
requirement for attribution that is not
required under the copyright law, meaning
that the creator will always receive credit
for his or her work.
Creative Commons (CC) began in the
basement of Stanford Law School in
2001 and was created to restore
copyright to the nation’s founders’
original intent: to promote innovation
and creativity. Many creators want their
works to be freely distributed. Many
people feel that the current copyright
climate inhibits rather than
promotes creativity.
Appending a
The CC Licenses
copyright statement
There are two uses that
and a © to a
are controlled by CC
work defines that
licenses and three
“all rights are
restrictions.
reserved.”
These combine
Omitting the
to create six
Digital technology
copyright
different
and the internet
statement
licenses and a
and symbol,
simple regimen
have
promoted
however, does
that can be
increased creativity
understood by
lawyers
and
including many
non-lawyers
derivative works.
alike.
The two
uses are the
freedom to share and
the freedom to remix.
The freedom to share
permits users to reprint
materials, place them on a website,
publish them, etc. The freedom to remix
involves combining works to create a
new derivative work. The rights holder
can permit either or both of these
freedoms.
It is possible to limit these
freedoms in three easy ways. The
creator may prohibit commercial
use, prohibit derivatives, or permit
derivatives but require that they have
the same CC license as the original
materials.
The CC website http://creative
commons.org/about/licenses describes
not
the six licenses thusly:
change that
• Attribution: This license lets
status under current law.
others distribute, remix, tweak,
Unlike the copyright statement, a
and build upon your work, even
CC license symbol states only the rights
commercially, as long as they
reserved by the creator and thus releases
credit you for the original
all other rights to the user. It enables
creation. This is the most
immediate use of the material without
having to consult the creator. It does not
accommodating of licenses
prevent the reserved uses—they simply
offered, in terms of what others
require permission. The idea is to
can do with your works licensed
promote the use of cultural, educational,
under Attribution.
22
AALL Spectrum
■
April 2010
• Attribution Share Alike: This
license lets others remix, tweak,
and build upon your work, even
for commercial reasons, as long as
they credit you and license their
new creations under the identical
terms. This license is often
compared to open source software
licenses. All new works based on
yours will carry the same license,
so any derivatives will also allow
commercial use.
• Attribution No Derivatives:
This license allows for
redistribution, commercial and
non-commercial, as long as it is
passed along unchanged and in
whole with credit to you.
• Attribution Non-Commercial:
This license lets others remix,
tweak, and build upon your work
non-commercially, and, although
their new works must also
acknowledge you and be noncommercial, they don’t have to
license their derivative works on
the same terms.
• Attribution Non-Commercial
Share Alike: This license
lets others remix, tweak, and
build upon your work noncommercially, as long as they
credit you and license their new
creations under the identical
terms. Others can download and
redistribute your work just like
under the Attribution NonCommercial No Derivatives
license, but they can also translate,
make remixes, and produce new
creations based on your work.
All new work based on yours
will carry the same license, so
any derivatives will also be noncommercial in nature.
• Attribution Non-Commercial
No Derivatives: This license is the
most restrictive of the six main
licenses allowing redistribution.
This license is often called the
“free advertising” license because
it allows others to download your
works and share them with others
as long as they mention you and
link back to you, but they can’t
change them in any way or use
them commercially.
Two additional tools are available
on the CC website: CC0 and Public
Domain Certification. CC0 permits
you to waive all interests in your work.
It effectively places the material in the
public domain as if the copyright period
had expired. The Public Domain
Certification tool is used to certify that
a work has already entered the public
domain. This tool may not be valid
outside of the United States. (For more
information, see http://creative
commons.org/publicdomain.)
AALLSpectrum_Apr:1
3/17/10
1:27 PM
Page 23
Materials must be registered on the
Creative Commons website and three
formats of the chosen license are created.
All of the licenses clearly state attribution
and provide a means of contacting the
author. The first format is a “Commons
Deed,” which explains the license in
ordinary English (described by CC as
“human readable”). The second format
is “Legal Code,” which is intended to
be read by lawyers. Lastly, a machinereadable “Resource Description
Framework” metadata describes the key
license terms. This machine code is
accessible by many search engines such as
Google and Yahoo. It is possible to search
only for materials with CC licenses using
these search tools. The results of the
searches can then be used immediately
without fear. Some sites, like the photo
sharing site, www.flickr.com, include a
CC license option in their file upload
procedure and their site search engine.
Participating search engines are listed at
http://search.creativecommons.org.
CC licenses have been adopted by
many artists, musicians, filmmakers, and
educators. Wikipedia; Google Books; the
Public Library of Science (PLos); and
Oyez, the U.S. Supreme Court media
website, all use CC licenses. The
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
OpenCourseWare website provides open
access to the university’s course materials
published under the CC Attribution
Non-Commercial Share Alike license.
There are even add-in tools available for
Microsoft Office and Open Office to
facilitate adding these licenses.
To use CC licenses, you much first
choose the license at http://creative
commons.org/choose. The website will
generate a url for the license and provide
graphical icons if you choose to use
them. The licenses are non-revocable,
meaning you can remove the license
from the material but you cannot
take back permission from those who
have already used or downloaded the
materials. The license is also perpetual—
it is not possible to restrict the time
span of the license—and non-exclusive,
meaning it is still possible to submit the
work for publication or sell the right to
include it in a commercial work. Since
the CC license is irrevocable and nonexclusive, it is not possible to grant an
exclusive license at a later date.
Please consider using CC licenses
for your work. It is an easy way to tell
people that they can share, use, and
build upon it. These licenses are the
ideal vehicle for individuals who want
their materials to be widely seen and
used. Also, be sure to keep alert for the
CC symbols on works you see on the
internet, as they are intended to be
shared and used. ■
Steven J. Melamut (melamut@
email.und.edu) is information technology
services librarian at the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill Law
Library.
'R\RXKDYHD
EULJKWLGHD"
$SSO\IRUDQ$$//%1$&RQWLQXLQJ(GXFDWLRQ*UDQW
• The AALL/BNA Continuing Education Grants Program
helps fund educational programming outside of the
Annual Meeting. Educational programming that can be
distributed to the entire AALL membership will be given priority.
• Chapters, special interest sections, member institutions, and
individual AALL members are eligible.
• Guidelines for proposals and the application form are available online at
www.aallnet.org/prodev/grant_program.asp.
• The deadline for the fourth round
of proposals is May 6, 2010.
Memorials
AALL Spectrum has been advised of the deaths of Stanley Keith Pearce and Marjorie C. Wilcox.
Mr. Pearce graduated from the University of Washington with a BA in psychology in 1950, a JD in 1956, and a master’s
degree in law librarianship in 1957. He was employed at the Los Angeles County Law Library until he joined the law firm of
O’Melveny and Myers in Los Angeles in 1959, where he remained until his retirement in January 1986. Mr. Pearce served
as president of the Southern California Association of Law Libraries from 1968-1969 and as a member of the AALL
Executive Board from 1977-1980. He died on February 2.
Ms. Wilcox attended school in Fort Wayne, Indiana, before moving to Grand Rapids, Michigan. She was an active member
of her church and worked to provide services to the blind. In 1968, Wilcox became executive director and law librarian for
the Grand Rapids Bar Association, where she remained until her retirement in 1988. In addition to receiving the Liberty Bell
Award from the bar association, Wilcox served as the first president of the Michigan Association of Law Libraries. She died
on February 5.
AALL Spectrum carries brief announcements of members’ deaths in the “Memorials” column. Traditional memorials should
be submitted to Janet Sinder, Law Library Journal, University of Maryland At Baltimore, Thurgood Marshall Law Library,
501 W. Fayette Street, Baltimore, MD 21201-1768; jsinder@law.umaryland.edu.
AALL Spectrum
■
April 2010
23
Download